Letters to the Editor

I’m a bit confused. Berkeley education officials are being criminally investigated for what may have been a breach of conduct for allegedly helping with the school bonding issue on county time.

Meanwhile, Charleston county officials spent 1,000 hours working on a TIF for The Beach Company, and there is no outcry whatsoever.

I guess Charleston County is lucky to have so much extra money and time to assist rich companies. Lucky also for having taxpayers who don’t care what happens to their tax money.

And I’m lucky I live in Dorchester County.

Paul Vecellio

E. Edgefield Drive

Summerville

Karen Floyd’s heartfelt reflections on the loss of her mother to breast cancer and her own lifelong struggle with such fears highlight several important points. Unlike almost any other diagnosis, breast cancer has two immediate associations: fear of cancer and having one’s life cut short, and fear of disfigurement.

Angelina Jolie’s decision is about empowerment. Accurate information empowers all patients. Bilateral prophylactic mastectomies reduce a woman’s risk of developing breast cancer by 95 to 98 percent. The chances of living a full life are higher than if one never had breast cancer.

Not all women undergoing such surgery are BRCA1 or BRCA2 positive. Some have a strong family history without carrying the gene mutation.

Others may have breasts that are difficult to examine by physical examination alone or with standard mammograms. While this choice seems radical, it can be life saving and life altering for that small group of women who might benefit from it.

Today’s reconstructive options are highly advanced, almost always available in the immediate setting, usually in one stage at the time of the mastectomy, and can leave a woman feeling proud of her figure and emotionally relieved of worry and fear.

Ram Kalus, M.D.

Lone Tree Drive

Charleston

With regard to cutting trees along I-26, I believe South Carolina needs more trees and fewer careless drivers.

Kenneth Anderson Jr.

Planters Curve

Mount Pleasant

The Berkeley County School Board voted to use taxpayers’ funds to defend district employees, claiming that it acted “in good faith.” Does one act “in good faith” while driving 65 mph in a 15 mph school zone?

At the May 14 board meeting, there was standing-room only, the majority being district employees. They have every right to express their support for the administration. It was an enthusiastic display of support, not unlike exuberant shareholders at an Amway convention.

Paeans of praise for the superintendent were lavish. Evaluations by the board ranged from divine to superlative, notwithstanding alleged violations of ethical conduct.

The superintendent may be entitled to these accolades, but the “in good faith” controversy surrounding the Yes 4 Schools campaign casts a shadow on his evaluation. Why did the school board not investigate “in house” and advise the public of the results? Instead, they circled the wagons and poked in the eye the taxpayer who registered the complaint.

To use tax revenue to defend alleged culprits is inexcusable. It is simply not credible to suggest that the superintendent and staff did not have knowledge of the laws that they may have broken.

B.W. Moore

Kennington Drive

Goose Creek

Here are some issues this administration has claimed ignorance of or denied.

The “Fast and Furious” gun- running program associated with thousands of Mexicans and one U.S. Border Patrol agent being killed.

The Benghazi incident where four Americans were left without support and killed.

The FBI’s failure to provide intel about the Boston bombers to the Boston police. Three dead and over 260 injured.

The IRS’ unauthorized auditing of select political groups.

The unauthorized wire-tapping of Associated Press journalists.

Oh, and let’s not discuss the chopper shot down in Afghanistan in 2011, killing 25 Special Ops guys on board.

No matter who is questioned, the answer is always the same, either they don’t know or are investigating.

We have here federal agencies that either don’t care, really don’t know anything or are lying.

Several recent letters have concerned the trees in the I-26 median. Or maybe it’s the forest that we can’t see.

I’m not sure why this major stretch of interstate wasn’t cleared during its initial construction. But the results have been apparent for some time now. It’s amazing how long it takes some folks to see the “forest” and equally amazing how others always see the “trees.”

Most writers seem to think that speed is the major culprit. At what speed would you feel comfortable hitting one of those trees? I don’t think 60 mph is going to be a whole lot better than 80 mph. Your chances of survival are slim at best.

Sure, I love trees. It’s just that the tunnel doesn’t block my vision and neither does the forest. The death rate on this section of I-26 is not going to change until the trees are removed. Whose life is more important to you?

RANDALL KEMMERLIN Yeamans Hall Road

Hanahan

Please explain to me why Tim Scott would vote “no” on S. 601, a bill which provides flood control, navigation and shoreline protection for his home state of South Carolina. He voted against 700 Corps of Engineers projects we need to protect our state.

With all the shoreline devastation we have seen from passing hurricanes and the damage these storms can inflict on states whose economy depends on tourism and ports, why in the world would any representative from Charleston vote “no” to an important bill like this?

I thought he ran on being supportive of infrastructure for his district including harbor dredging. Thanks. Tim, for trying to throw your home state under the bus.

This is the political insanity that continues to make South Carolina the laughingstock of the nation.

Christine Wilkerson

W. Hudson Avenue

Folly Beach

While the current IRS scandal appears to be gathering some momentum and certain factions look for wrongdoing in high places, one thing has to be kept in mind. It is almost certain that there are no “smoking guns” and that the president and his immediate lieutenants gave no orders, or even unambiguous suggestions, directly to anyone in the Treasury Department or the IRS. They didn’t need to.

Since early in his administration, the president had been publicly singling out conservative organizations and even individuals (e.g., Idaho businessman Frank VanderSloot in April 2012) for special opprobrium for the offense of opposing his policies.

Does anyone think the culpable IRS agents didn’t think they knew what their president really wanted?

Incidentally, according to Kimberly Strassel of The Wall Street Journal: “Mr. VanderSloot, who had never been audited before, was subject to three in the four months after Mr. Obama teed him up for such scrutiny.”

As Justice John Marshall once said, “The power to tax involves the power to destroy.”